Internet DRAFT - draft-melnikov-extra-quota
draft-melnikov-extra-quota
Network Working Group D. Cridland
Internet-Draft
Intended status: Standards Track A. Melnikov
Expires: September 12, 2019 Isode
March 11, 2019
IMAP QUOTA Extension
draft-melnikov-extra-quota-00
Abstract
The QUOTA extension of the Internet Message Access Protocol (RFC
3501) permits administrative limits on resource usage (quotas) to be
manipulated through the IMAP protocol.
This memo obsoletes RFC 2087, but attempts to remain backwards
compatible whenever possible.
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on September 12, 2019.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
Cridland & Melnikov Expires September 12, 2019 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft IMAP QUOTA March 2019
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
This document may contain material from IETF Documents or IETF
Contributions published or made publicly available before November
10, 2008. The person(s) controlling the copyright in some of this
material may not have granted the IETF Trust the right to allow
modifications of such material outside the IETF Standards Process.
Without obtaining an adequate license from the person(s) controlling
the copyright in such materials, this document may not be modified
outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative works of it may
not be created outside the IETF Standards Process, except to format
it for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other
than English.
Table of Contents
1. Document Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Introduction and Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.1. Resource . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.1.1. Name . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.1.2. Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.2. Quota Root . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4. Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.1. Commands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.1.1. GETQUOTA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.1.2. GETQUOTAROOT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.1.3. SETQUOTA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.1.4. New STATUS attributes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.2. Responses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.2.1. QUOTA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.2.2. QUOTAROOT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.3. Response Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.3.1. OVERQUOTA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5. Resource Type Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5.1. STORAGE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5.2. MESSAGE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
5.3. MAILBOX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
6. Formal syntax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
9. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
10. Changes since RFC 2087 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Cridland & Melnikov Expires September 12, 2019 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft IMAP QUOTA March 2019
1. Document Conventions
In protocol examples, this document uses a prefix of "C: " to denote
lines sent by the client to the server, and "S: " for lines sent by
the server to the client. Lines prefixed with "// " are comments
explaining the previous protocol line. These prefixes and comments
are not part of the protocol. Lines without any of these prefixes
are continuations of the previous line, and no line break is present
in the protocol unless specifically mentioned.
Again, for examples, the hierarchy separator on the server is
presumed to be "/" throughout. None of these assumptions is required
nor recommended by this document.
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC2119 [RFC2119].
Other capitalised words are IMAP4 [RFC3501] keywords or keywords from
this document.
2. Introduction and Overview
The capability "QUOTA", denotes a RFC2087 [RFC2087] compliant server.
Some commands and responses defined in this document are not present
in such servers, and clients MUST NOT rely on their presence in the
absence of any capability beginning with "QUOTA=".
Any server compliant with this document MUST also return at least one
capability starting with "QUOTA=RES-" prefix, as described in
Section 3.1.
This document also reserves all other capabilities starting with
"QUOTA=" prefix to future standard track or experimental extensions
to this document.
Quotas can be used to restrict clients for administrative reasons,
but the QUOTA extension can also be used to indicate system limits
and current usage levels to clients.
Although RFC2087 [RFC2087] specified an IMAP4 QUOTA extension, and
this has seen deployment in servers, it has seen little deployment in
clients. Since the meaning of the resources was left implementation-
dependant, it was impossible for a client implementation to determine
which resources were supported, and impossible to determine which
mailboxes were in a given quota root, without a priori knowledge of
the implementation.
Cridland & Melnikov Expires September 12, 2019 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft IMAP QUOTA March 2019
3. Terms
3.1. Resource
A resource has a name, a formal definition.
3.1.1. Name
[[CREF1: Fix IANA considerations section.]]
The resource name is an atom, as defined in IMAP4 [RFC3501]. These
MUST be registered with IANA. Implementation specific resources
begin with "V-" .
Supported resource names MUST be advertised as a capability, by
prepending the resource name with "QUOTA=RES-". A server compliant
with this specification is not required to support all reported
resource types on all quota roots.
3.1.2. Definition
The resource definition or document containing it, while not visible
through the protocol, SHOULD be registered with IANA.
The usage of a resource MUST be represented as a 32 bit unsigned
integer. 0 indicates that the resource is exhausted. Usage integers
MUST NOT represent proportional use, such that a client can compare
available resource between two separate quota roots or servers with
reasonable accuracy.
Limits will be specified as, and MUST be represented as, an integer.
0 indicates that any usage is prohibited.
Limits may be hard or soft - that is, an implementation MAY choose,
or be configured, to disallow any command if the limit on a resource
is or would be exceeded.
All resources which the server handles must be advertised in a
CAPABILITY constisting of the resource name prefixed by "QUOTA=RES-".
For compatability with RFC2087 [RFC2087], a client which discovers
resources available on the server which are not advertised through
this mechanism MUST treat them as if they were completely opaque, and
without any meaning.
The resources STORAGE (Section 5.1), MESSAGE (Section 5.2) and
MAILBOX (Section 5.3) are defined in this document.
Cridland & Melnikov Expires September 12, 2019 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft IMAP QUOTA March 2019
3.2. Quota Root
Each mailbox has zero or more implementation-defined named "quota
roots". Each quota root has zero or more resource limits (quotas).
All mailboxes that share the same named quota root share the resource
limits of the quota root.
Quota root names need not be mailbox names, nor is there any
relationship defined by this memo between a Quota root name and a
mailbox name. A quota root name is an astring, as defined in IMAP4
[RFC3501]. It SHOULD be treated as an opaque string by any clients.
Quota roots are used since not all implementations may be able to
calculate usage, or apply quotas, on arbitary mailboxes or mailbox
hierarchies.
Not all resources may be limitable or calculatable for all quota
roots. Further, not all resources may support all limits - some
limits may be present in the underlying system. A server
implementation of this memo SHOULD advise the client of such inherent
limits, by generating QUOTA (Section 4.2.1) responses and SHOULD
advise the client of which resources are limitable for a particular
quota root. A SETQUOTA (Section 4.1.3) command MAY also round a
quota limit in an implementation dependant way, if the granularity of
the underlying system demands it. A client MUST be prepared for a
SETQUOTA (Section 4.1.3) command to fail if a limit cannot be set.
Implementation Notes:
This means that, for example under UNIX, a quota root may have a
MESSAGE (Section 5.2) quota always set due to the number of inodes
available on the filesystem, and similarly STORAGE (Section 5.1) may
be rounded to the nearest block and limited by free filesystem space.
4. Definitions
4.1. Commands
The following commands exist for manipulation and querying quotas.
4.1.1. GETQUOTA
Arguments: quota root
Responses: REQUIRED untagged responses: QUOTA
Result: OK - getquota completed
NO - getquota error: no such quota root, permission denied
BAD - command unknown or arguments invalid
Cridland & Melnikov Expires September 12, 2019 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft IMAP QUOTA March 2019
The GETQUOTA command takes the name of a quota root and returns the
quota root's resource usage and limits in an untagged QUOTA response.
The client can try using any of the resource types returned in
CAPABILITY response (i.e. all capability items with "QUOTA=RES-"
prefix), however the server is not required to support any specific
resource type for any particular quota root.
Example:
S: * CAPABILITY [...] QUOTA QUOTA=RES-STORAGE [...]
[...]
C: G0001 GETQUOTA "!partition/sda4"
S: * QUOTA "!partition/sda4" (STORAGE 104 10923847)
S: G0001 OK Getquota complete
4.1.2. GETQUOTAROOT
Arguments: mailbox name
Responses: REQUIRED untagged responses: QUOTAROOT, QUOTA
Result: OK - getquotaroot completed
NO - getquotaroot error: no such mailbox, permission denied
BAD - command unknown or arguments invalid
The GETQUOTAROOT command takes the name of a mailbox and returns the
list of quota roots for the mailbox in an untagged QUOTAROOT
response. For each listed quota root, it also returns the quota
root's resource usage and limits in an untagged QUOTA response.
[[CREF2: Need to clarify that the mailbox name doesn't have to
reference an existing mailbox. This can be handy in order to
determine which quotaroot would apply to a mailbox when it gets
created.]]
Example:
S: * CAPABILITY [...] QUOTA QUOTA=RES-STORAGE QUOTA=RES-MESSAGE
[...]
[...]
C: G0002 GETQUOTAROOT INBOX
S: * QUOTAROOT INBOX "#user/alice" "!partition/sda4"
S: * QUOTA "#user/alice" (MESSAGE 42 1000)
S: * QUOTA "!partition/sda4" (STORAGE 104 10923847)
S: G0002 OK Getquotaroot complete
Cridland & Melnikov Expires September 12, 2019 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft IMAP QUOTA March 2019
4.1.3. SETQUOTA
Arguments: quota root
list of resource limits
Responses: untagged responses: QUOTA
Result: OK - setquota completed
NO - setquota error: can't set that data
BAD - command unknown or arguments invalid
The SETQUOTA command takes the name of a mailbox quota root and a
list of resource limits. The resource limits for the named quota
root are changed to be the specified limits. Any previous resource
limits for the named quota root are discarded.
If the named quota root did not previously exist, an implementation
may optionally create it and change the quota roots for any number of
existing mailboxes in an implementation-defined manner.
[[CREF3: Should the server be sending untagged QUOTA responses for
all side effect changes?]]
Example:
S: * CAPABILITY [...] QUOTA QUOTA=RES-STORAGE QUOTA=RES-MESSAGE
[...]
[...]
C: S0000 GETQUOTA "#user/alice"
S: * QUOTA "#user/alice" (STORAGE 54 111 MESSAGE 42 1000)
S: S0000 OK Getquota completed
C: S0001 SETQUOTA "#user/alice" (STORAGE 510)
S: * QUOTA "#user/alice" (STORAGE 58 512)
// The server has rounded the STORAGE quota limit requested to the
nearest 512 blocks of 1024 octects, or else another client has
performed a near simultaneous SETQUOTA, using a limit of 512.
S: S0001 OK Rounded quota
C: S0002 SETQUOTA "!partition/sda4" (STORAGE 99999999)
S: * QUOTA "!partition/sda4" (STORAGE 104 10923847)
// The server has not changed the quota, since this is a
filesystem limit, and cannot be changed. The QUOTA response here
is entirely optional.
S: S0002 NO Cannot change system limit
Cridland & Melnikov Expires September 12, 2019 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft IMAP QUOTA March 2019
4.1.4. New STATUS attributes
DELETED-MESSAGES and DELETED-STORAGE status data items allow to
estimate the amount of resource freed by an EXPUNGE on a mailbox.
DELETED-MESSAGES status data item requests the server to return the
number of messages with \Deleted flag set.
DELETED-STORAGE status data item requests the server to return the
amount of storage space that can be reclaimed by performing EXPUNGE
on the mailbox. The server SHOULD return the exact value, however it
is recognized that the server may have to do non-trivial amount of
work to calculate it. If the calculation of the exact value would
take a long time, the server MAY instead return the sum of
RFC822.SIZEs of messages with the \Deleted flag set.
Example:
S: * CAPABILITY [...] QUOTA QUOTA=RES-STORAGE QUOTA-RES-MESSAGE
[...]
[...]
C: S0003 STATUS INBOX (MESSAGES DELETED-MESSAGES DELETED-STORAGE)
S: * STATUS INBOX (MESSAGES 12 DELETED-MESSAGES 4 DELETED-STORAGE
8)
// 12 messages, 4 of which would be deleted when an EXPUNGE
happens.
S: S0003 OK Status complete.
4.2. Responses
The following responses may be sent by the server.
4.2.1. QUOTA
Data: quota root name
list of resource names, usages, and limits
This response occurs as a result of a GETQUOTA or GETQUOTAROOT
command. The first string is the name of the quota root for which
this quota applies.
The name is followed by a S-expression format list of the resource
usage and limits of the quota root. The list contains zero or more
triplets. Each triplet contains a resource name, the current usage
of the resource, and the resource limit.
Cridland & Melnikov Expires September 12, 2019 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft IMAP QUOTA March 2019
Resources not named in the list are not limited in the quota root.
Thus, an empty list means there are no administrative resource limits
in the quota root.
Example: S: * QUOTA "" (STORAGE 10 512)
4.2.2. QUOTAROOT
Data: mailbox name
zero or more quota root names
This response occurs as a result of a GETQUOTAROOT command. The
first string is the mailbox and the remaining strings are the names
of the quota roots for the mailbox.
Example:
S: * QUOTAROOT INBOX ""
S: * QUOTAROOT comp.mail.mime
4.3. Response Codes
4.3.1. OVERQUOTA
OVERQUOTA response code SHOULD be returned in the tagged NO response
to an APPEND/COPY when the addition of the message(s) puts mailbox
over any one of its quota limits.
Example:
S: C: A003 APPEND Drafts (\Seen $MDNSent) {310}
S: + Ready for literal data
C: Date: Mon, 7 Feb 1994 21:52:25 -0800 (PST)
C: From: Fred Foobar <foobar@Blurdybloop.COM>
C: Subject: afternoon meeting
C: To: mooch@owatagu.siam.edu
C: Message-Id: <B27397-0100000@Blurdybloop.COM>
C: MIME-Version: 1.0
C: Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
C:
C: Hello Joe, do you think we can meet at 3:30 tomorrow?
C:
S: A003 NO [OVERQUOTA] APPEND Failed
The OVERQUOTA response code MAY also be returned in an untagged NO
response when the currently selected mailbox exceeds soft quota.
[[CREF4: What about per-user quotas when no mailbox is selected or
Cridland & Melnikov Expires September 12, 2019 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft IMAP QUOTA March 2019
when the destination mailbox (different from the currently selected
one) is affected?]] The response code MUST be followed by the tag of
the command that caused this (such as APPEND or COPY). The tag MUST
be omitted if an external event (e.g. LMTP delivery or APPEND/COPY
in another IMAP connection) caused this event.
Example:
S: C: A003 APPEND Drafts (\Seen $MDNSent) {310}
S: + Ready for literal data
C: Date: Mon, 7 Feb 1994 21:52:25 -0800 (PST)
C: From: Fred Foobar <foobar@Blurdybloop.COM>
C: Subject: afternoon meeting
C: To: mooch@owatagu.siam.edu
C: Message-Id: <B27397-0100000@Blurdybloop.COM>
C: MIME-Version: 1.0
C: Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
C:
C: Hello Joe, do you think we can meet at 3:30 tomorrow?
C:
S: * NO [OVERQUOTA A003] Soft quota has been exceeded
S: A003 OK [APPENDUID 38505 3955] APPEND completed
5. Resource Type Definitions
The following resource types are defined in this memo. A server
supporting a resource type MUST advertise this as a CAPABILITY with a
name consisting of the resource name prefixed by "QUOTA=RES-". A
server MAY support mupltiple resource types, and MUST advertise all
resource types it supports.
5.1. STORAGE
The physical space estimate, in units of 1024 octets, of the
mailboxes governed by the quota root. This MAY not be the same as
the sum of the RFC822.SIZE of the messages. Some implementations MAY
include metadata sizes for the messages and mailboxes, other
implementations MAY store messages in such a way that the physical
space used is smaller, for example due to use of compression.
Additional messages might not increase the usage. Client MUST NOT
use the usage figure for anything other than informational purposes,
for example, they MUST NOT refuse to APPEND a message if the limit
less the usage is smaller than the RFC822.SIZE divided by 1024 of the
message, but it MAY warn about such condition.
The usage figure may change as a result of performing actions not
associated with adding new messages to the mailbox, such as SEARCH,
Cridland & Melnikov Expires September 12, 2019 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft IMAP QUOTA March 2019
since this may increase the amount of metadata included in the
calculations.
Support for this resource MUST be indicated by the server by
advertising the CAPABILITY "QUOTA=RES-STORAGE".
A resource named the same was also given as an example in RFC2087
[RFC2087], clients conformant to this specification connecting to
servers which do not advertise "QUOTA=RES-STORAGE", yet allow a
resource named STORAGE, MUST NOT assume that it is the same resource.
[[CREF5: ?]]
5.2. MESSAGE
The number of messages stored within the mailboxes governed by the
quota root. This MUST be an exact number, however, clients MUST NOT
assume that a change in the usage indicates a change in the number of
messages available, since the quota root may include mailboxes the
client has no access to.
Support for this resource MUST be indicated by the server by
advertising the CAPABILITY "QUOTA=RES-MESSAGE".
A resource named the same was also given as an example in RFC2087
[RFC2087], clients conformant to this specification connecting to
servers which do not advertise "QUOTA=RES-MESSAGE", yet allow a
resource named MESSAGE, MUST NOT assume that it is the same resource.
5.3. MAILBOX
The number of mailboxes governed by the quota root. This MUST be an
exact number, however, clients MUST NOT assume that a change in the
usage indicates a change in the number of mailboxes, since the quota
root may include mailboxes the client has no access to.
Support for this resource MUST be indicated by the server by
advertising the CAPABILITY "QUOTA=RES-MAILBOX".
6. Formal syntax
The following syntax specification uses the Augmented Backus-Naur
Form (ABNF) notation as specified in [ABNF].
Non-terminals referenced but not defined below are as defined by
IMAP4 [RFC3501].
Except as noted otherwise, all alphabetic characters are case-
insensitive. The use of upper or lower case characters to define
Cridland & Melnikov Expires September 12, 2019 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft IMAP QUOTA March 2019
token strings is for editorial clarity only. Implementations MUST
accept these strings in a case-insensitive fashion.
getquota = "GETQUOTA" SP quota-root-name
getquotaroot = "GETQUOTAROOT" SP mailbox
quota-list = "(" quota-resource *(SP quota-resource) ")"
quota-resource = resource-name SP resource-usage SP resource-
limit
quota-response = "QUOTA" SP quota-root-name SP quota-list
quotaroot-response = "QUOTAROOT" SP mailbox *(SP quota-root-name)
setquota = "SETQUOTA" SP quota-root-name SP setquota-list
setquota-list = "(" [setquota-resource *(SP setquota-resource)]
")"
setquota-resource = resource-name SP resource-limit
quota-root-name = astring
resource-limit = number
resource-name = "STORAGE" / "MESSAGE" / "MAILBOX" /
resource-name-vnd /
resource-name-ext
resource-name-vnd = "V-" atom
;; Vendor specific, must be registered with IANA.
;; The "V-" prefix should be followed by a domain
name
;; under vendor's control.
resource-name-ext = atom
;; Not starting with V- and defined
;; in a Standard Track or Experimental RFC
resource-names = "(" [resource-name *(SP resource-name)] ")"
resource-usage = number
;; must be less than corresponding resource-limit
capability-quota = capa-quota-res
Cridland & Melnikov Expires September 12, 2019 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft IMAP QUOTA March 2019
capa-quota-res = "QUOTA=RES-" resource-name
status-att =/ "DELETED-MESSAGES" / "DELETED-STORAGE"
[[CREF6: Should this be optional unless the
server implements MESSAGE/STORAGE?]]
resp-text-code =/ "OVERQUOTA" [SP tag]
7. Security Considerations
Implementors should be careful to make sure the implementation of
these commands does not violate the site's security policy. The
resource usage of other users is likely to be considered confidential
information and should not be divulged to unauthorized persons.
8. IANA Considerations
IMAP4 capabilities are registered by publishing a standards track or
IESG approved experimental RFC. The registry is currently located
at:
http://www.iana.org/assignments/imap4-capabilities
IANA is requested to update definition of the QUOTA extension to
point to this document.
[[CREF7: Define registry for "QUOTA=RES-" and add initial
registrations.]]
9. Acknowledgments
Authors of this document would like to thank the following people who
provided useful comments or participated in discussions that lead to
this update to RFC 2087:
John Myers,
Cyrus Daboo,
Lyndon Nerenberg
This document is a revision of RFC 2087. It borrows a lot of text
from RFC 2087. Thus work of the RFC 2087 author John Myers is
appreciated.
Cridland & Melnikov Expires September 12, 2019 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft IMAP QUOTA March 2019
10. Changes since RFC 2087
This document is a revision of RFC 2087. It tries to clarify meaning
of different terms used by RFC 2087. It also provides more examples,
gives guidance on allowed server behaviour, defines IANA registry for
quota resource types and provides initial registrations for 3 of
them.
When compared with RFC 2087, this document defines one more commonly
used resource type, adds optional OVERQUOTA response code and defines
two extra STATUS data items ("DELETED-MESSAGES" and "DELETED-
STORAGE")
11. References
11.1. Normative References
[ABNF] Crocker, D., Ed. and P. Overell, Ed., "Augmented BNF for
Syntax Specifications: ABNF", RFC 4234, October 2005.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC3501] Crispin, M., "INTERNET MESSAGE ACCESS PROTOCOL - VERSION
4rev1", RFC 3501, DOI 10.17487/RFC3501, March 2003,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3501>.
11.2. Informative References
[RFC2087] Myers, J., "IMAP4 QUOTA extension", RFC 2087,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2087, January 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2087>.
Authors' Addresses
Dave A. Cridland
Email: dave@cridland.net
Alexey Melnikov
Isode Limited
Email: alexey.melnikov@isode.com
URI: https://www.isode.com
Cridland & Melnikov Expires September 12, 2019 [Page 14]
